Mock Test: Sports Ethics and Integrity Exam for Students Studying Sports Management

Mock Test: Sports Ethics and Integrity Exam for Students Studying Sports Management

Hook: If you’re a sports management student worried about navigating scandals, legal fallout, and real-time integrity threats—especially after the high-profile point-shaving indictments of 2025–2026—you need practice that tests judgment, not just theory. This mock exam gives you realistic case studies, clear grading rubrics, and prevention strategies you can apply as a future integrity officer, compliance lead, or team manager.

Why this mock test matters in 2026

Sports integrity is at a tipping point in 2026. Legal actions unsealed in late 2025 and early 2026 — including a major federal indictment involving dozens of college athletes and organized gambling — show how quickly games, careers, and institutions can unravel. At the same time, developments like expanded legal sports betting markets, micro-betting, live in-play markets, and AI-driven monitoring tools change the threat landscape. This exam trains you to respond ethically and operationally.

Learning objectives

• Apply ethical frameworks to real sports integrity dilemmas.
• Identify legal consequences and institutional sanctions for misconduct.
• Recommend prevention, detection, and response strategies using 2026 tools and practices.
• Practice communicating decisions to stakeholders under reputational pressure.

How to use this mock test

Complete the exam in one 90-minute sitting to simulate real-world time pressure. Use the model answers and rubrics to self-grade. Instructors can adapt questions for closed-book or open-book formats. Important: this exam emphasizes reasoning and practical measures—document your sources and cite governing rules (NCAA/FIFA/local laws) where relevant.

Exam format and rules

• Duration: 90 minutes
• Total marks: 100
• Sections: A (MCQs) 20 marks; B (Short answers) 30 marks; C (Case studies, long-form) 50 marks
• Use modern references (2024–2026) for legal and integrity frameworks where applicable.

Section A — Multiple Choice (20 marks — 1 mark each)

1. Which of the following best describes point-shaving?
   • A. Betting on the outright winner of a match
   • B. Deliberately manipulating the score margin to affect spread bets
   • C. Athletes taking performance-enhancing drugs
   • D. Coaches recruiting players improperly
2. Which regulation body typically imposes scholarship forfeiture and team sanctions for NCAA student-athlete involvement in gambling?
3. Which legal charge most commonly appears in federal sports-fixing indictments?
4. True or False: Micro-betting limits the integrity risk compared with traditional match betting.
5. Which technology has been widely adopted by integrity units by 2026 to detect unusual betting patterns?

Answer key (Section A)

1. B
2. NCAA or the relevant collegiate governing body
3. Conspiracy, wire fraud, or money laundering (case-specific)
4. False
5. AI-powered anomaly detection and real-time data feeds

Section B — Short Answer (30 marks)

Answer concisely (50–120 words each). Each question worth 6 marks.

1. Define the difference between match-fixing and point-shaving in operational terms. (6 marks)
2. List four immediate steps a university must take when an athlete is suspected of participating in a gambling ring. (6 marks)
3. Explain two ways AI both helps and complicates sports integrity monitoring by 2026. (6 marks)
4. Identify three legal defenses a defendant might claim in a point-shaving indictment and explain why they may or may not succeed. (6 marks)
5. Summarize the role of a sport integrity officer during the first 72 hours of a public allegation. (6 marks)

Suggested points for marking (Section B)

• Q1: Match-fixing = outcome manipulation; point-shaving = margin manipulation to affect spread bets; examples; parties involved.
• Q2: Preserve evidence, suspend athlete per policy, notify counsel and governing body, cooperate with law enforcement, support student welfare.
• Q3: Helps = anomaly detection, pattern recognition, predictive models; complicates = false positives, adversarial attacks/deepfakes, bias and privacy concerns.
• Q4: Lack of intent, mistaken identity/coercion, entrapment; evaluate evidentiary standards and witness testimony.
• Q5: Communicate internally, legal coordination, media management, preserve evidence, provide support to athlete/victims, begin integrity audit.

Section C — Case Studies (50 marks)

These three cases simulate real-world complexity. Answer fully and cite policies, laws, and best practices. Marks for ethical analysis, legal awareness, and prevention strategies.

Case Study 1: The Point-Shaving Ring (20 marks)

Scenario: In early 2025, a federal investigation started into a gambling ring that recruited college basketball players across several Division I teams to manipulate scoring margins in return for cash. By late 2025 a federal indictment was unsealed naming multiple players, coaches, and a former professional athlete as conspirators. Games were impacted across two seasons. Your role: integrity compliance analyst for one of the implicated universities.

1. Identify and explain the key ethical violations in this scenario. (6 marks)
2. List the legal and organizational liabilities the university may face. (6 marks)
3. Draft a 250-word emergency action plan the university should implement in the first 7 days. Include external notifications and student welfare measures. (8 marks)

Model answers and rubric — Case Study 1

Key ethical violations: breach of competitive integrity, exploitation by external actors, conflicts of interest, failure of supervision, and neglect of duty of care towards student-athletes. (6 marks: 3 major points fully explained = full marks)

Liabilities: possible criminal investigations, civil suits from stakeholders (fans, bettors), NCAA sanctions (vacating wins, scholarship losses), reputational damage affecting enrollments and sponsorships, fiduciary exposure for athletics directors. (6 marks: list and explain)

Emergency action plan (8 marks — sample highlights):

• Immediate suspension of implicated athletes per interim policy while preserving due process.
• Preserve all digital and communication records; secure devices and accounts.
• Notify federal and state investigators and the NCAA/institutional counsel; commit to cooperation.
• Launch a parallel internal integrity review to identify control gaps, with a 30-day audit window.
• Set up crisis communications: one institutional spokesperson, factual transparency, and timelines.
• Provide counseling and legal support to non-implicated athletes; ensure academic continuity.
• Inform sponsors and donors per contractual requirements; prepare contingency budget scenarios.

Case Study 2: AI-Generated Deepfake and Social Pressure (15 marks)

Scenario: Mid-2026 (projected), a high-profile soccer player is targeted by an AI-generated deepfake video that appears to show the player deliberately underperforming while receiving cash in the stands. The video spreads quickly on social platforms. There are immediate calls for suspension and an investigation. Your role: head of communications for the club's integrity unit.

1. Explain the ethical considerations in rushing to punitive action based on viral AI content. (5 marks)
2. Outline a step-by-step verification and communication protocol to manage the crisis. (6 marks)
3. Recommend longer-term prevention and education measures related to AI misinformation. (4 marks)

Model answers — Case Study 2

Ethical considerations: presumption of innocence, harm to individual reputation, obligation to protect the integrity of competition while avoiding scapegoating, duty to verify sources, and preventing public panic. (5 marks)

Verification and communication protocol (6 marks):

1. Do not confirm allegations publicly; label as under review.
2. Immediately preserve the original content and obtain metadata; contact platform for takedown and provenance data.
3. Engage digital forensics and AI-detection experts to analyze authenticity.
4. Coordinate with law enforcement and governing bodies if extortion or criminal activity is suspected.
5. Communicate a consistent public message: provide timelines, affirm cooperation, and protect player welfare.

Prevention and education measures: mandatory AI literacy training for athletes and staff, simulated deepfake exercises, monitoring partnerships with content verification firms, and public awareness campaigns. (4 marks)

Case Study 3: Sponsor Conflict and Ticket Fraud (15 marks)

Scenario: A team sponsor pressures marketing to push a promotional contest that inadvertently incentivizes ticket-resale scalpers tied to an offshore betting market. Several matches later show suspicious ticket-scanning patterns and correlated spikes in suspicious bets. Your role: compliance officer for the league.

1. Identify the compliance failures and ethical risks. (5 marks)
2. Propose a policy change to prevent sponsor-driven conflicts that might fuel integrity risks. (5 marks)
3. Design an audit checklist that detects ticket-related fraud tied to betting markets. (5 marks)

Model answers — Case Study 3

Compliance failures: inadequate sponsor review, lack of risk-scoring for promotional mechanics, weak monitoring of ticket distribution, and failure to analyze cross-data between ticketing and betting platforms. Ethical risks: enabling illicit behavior, damaging fan trust, and revenue diversion. (5 marks)

Policy change (5 marks): Implement a mandatory sponsor integrity impact assessment requiring risk scoring for all promotions; approval by the league’s integrity unit; clauses forbidding incentivization of ticket resale or betting interaction; audit rights; and pre-approval of marketing mechanics.

Audit checklist (5 marks): cross-reference ticket purchase records with scanning logs; geo-temporal clustering of scanned entries; identify bulk-ticket purchasers and resale patterns; correlate betting market anomalies with ticket events; validate ID matching for premium seat entry; require third-party forensic audit annually.

Scoring and Passing Threshold

Total: 100 marks. Passing threshold for a professional ethics module: 70/100. Instructors should weight case study critical thinking higher when preparing candidates for industry roles.

Practical, Actionable Advice for Exam Prep and Real Roles

• Study actual cases: Review the 2025–2026 federal indictments and public integrity unit reports to understand charging patterns and evidence types.
• Practice documentation: Simulate preserving chain-of-custody for digital evidence (screenshots with metadata, secure storage) and produce incident logs.
• Learn the law: Know both criminal statutes (conspiracy, wire fraud, money laundering) and sport governance rules (NCAA, FIFA, national federations).
• Master stakeholder communication: Draft public statements, internal memos, and sponsor notifications under time constraints.
• Get familiar with technology: Understand how AI governance and detection tools, betting-market feeds, and ticketing analytics work by 2026.
• Role-play: Conduct tabletop exercises with legal counsel, PR, and athlete welfare teams to rehearse first 72-hour responses. Consider adaptive testing and feedback tools like adaptive feedback when training cohorts.

The Evolution of Sports Ethics & Integrity in 2026 — Trends You Must Know

Key developments shaping exams and careers in 2026:

• Regulatory convergence: Governments are coordinating cross-border enforcement for gambling crimes. Federal indictments in 2025–2026 signal more aggressive prosecutions.
• AI both tool and threat: AI systems power anomaly detection but also produce convincing deepfakes and adversarial examples. Integrity teams must adopt AI governance.
• Real-time integrity monitoring: Betting operators and leagues increasingly share live data feeds and alerts to detect suspicious in-play betting and micro-market manipulation.
• Education as prevention: Mandatory integrity curricula for student-athletes and staff are more common; some universities tie coursework completion to eligibility.
• Data privacy and ethics: As monitoring tools proliferate, compliance with data protection laws (GDPR-equivalents, youth data protections) is essential.

Sample Study Guide & Resources (2026 edition)

Readings and tools to prioritize:

• Recent federal public indictments and DOJ press releases on sports wagering (2024–2026).
• NCAA and national federation integrity policies and case rulings.
• Whitepapers on AI-driven betting anomaly detection (2025–2026).
• Best-practice guides from international integrity bodies (e.g., International Centre for Sport Security).
• Courses on sports law, crisis communications, and digital forensics and archiving—seek modules updated post-2024.

Exam-Taking Tips for Students

• Use the inverted-pyramid approach in answers: state your conclusion, then justify with law, policy, and ethics.
• When discussing prevention, include both technical and human elements—policy, education, monitoring, and whistleblower protections.
• Practice crisp timelines: first 24 hours, 72 hours, 30 days. Stakeholders want immediate containment and a roadmap.
• In case-study essays, always end with a one-paragraph recommended metric set to assess effectiveness (e.g., reduction in suspicious alerts, training completion rates, audit findings).

“Integrity is not just the absence of scandal; it's the active presence of safeguards, culture, and accountable processes.”

Sample Grading Rubric (for instructors)

• Depth of legal/ethical analysis — 40%
• Practicality of recommended steps — 30%
• Use of up-to-date (2024–2026) references or technology understanding — 15%
• Clarity of communication and stakeholder-aware framing — 15%

Final Takeaways — What Students Should Remember

• Preparation matters: Knowledge of law, governance, and technology reduces risk and improves outcomes.
• Be proactive: Policies, training, and monitoring are more effective than episodic responses.
• Balance speed with accuracy: In the age of viral deepfakes and rapid betting markets, measured verification beats rushed statements.
• Culture is critical: Ethical leadership and accessible reporting channels reduce vulnerability to exploitation.

Call to Action

Ready to test yourself? Download the printable exam packet, grading rubric, and instructor notes tailored for university modules and internship assessments. If you’re preparing for a career in sports management integrity, subscribe to weekly alerts for the latest case law, technology briefings, and sample mock exams updated throughout 2026. Take the first step: practice this mock test under timed conditions and compare your solutions to the model answers here.

Next steps: Click to download the full PDF mock exam, or sign up for a live workshop where we grade and review your answers with industry experts who worked investigations in 2025–2026.

Related Reading

• Adaptive Feedback Loops for Exams in 2026
• Safety & Privacy Checklist for Student Creators in 2026
• Deep Work 2026: How AI‑Augmented Focus Transforms Knowledge Work
• KeptSafe Cloud Storage Review: Encryption, Usability, and Cost (2026)
• Operational Playbook: Observability for Desktop AI Agents
• Why Mitski’s New Album Feels Like a Horror Film — And 7 Listening Setups to Match
• Migrating Analytics Pipelines to ClickHouse: A Technical Roadmap for Teams
• Campus Microbusiness Playbook 2026: From Pop‑Up Stands to Microbrands That Fund Tuition
• Govee RGBIC Smart Lamp Deal: How to Verify the Sale and Stack Offers to Pay Less Than a Regular Lamp
• Auction House Aesthetics: Using Renaissance Portraits to Inspire Vintage Blouse Collections